tv [untitled] November 22, 2011 9:00am-9:30am PST
i laughed. these people are either vindictive or have another agenda. maybe they want to own their own restaurant. i would never take my son or my employees to a place where people are drunk and throwing up. i have never seen groups of young people there. it is usually at an average of 40-60 and then students during the day. i do not see them there during the evening. it is mostly older visiting the place. it is a nightmare to have these sorts of accusations that are unfounded. thank you. >> hi, commissioners. i am a patron of bistro gambrinus. i have gone there once or twice a week since its inception.
we go there for a family dinner. i brought my grandparents therefore their birthdays. it is a very friendly place. we go there because of the food. i think it is the single best, i would call it russian restaurant in the city. it is on rival. i am very happy to go there to eat. i do indulge in the occasional beer. i do not go there for the purpose of getting drunk off of liquor. there are tepee -- tv's. the sound is muted. there is quiet music in the background. there may be a few games or cnn
on the tv, just like any restaurant. one and a half pages of beers and a half a page of food. i think there are six pages of food. there are salads, soups, i do not know how you fit that on two-thirds of a page. this is a full-service restaurant. gaiters to all kinds of different people. they come there to eat and have a good time. there are too many things that just do not add up. >> good afternoon. i am the person who is working there. a few small things. like someone said before, we are not trying to find a conflict.
we always try to talk to these young men and explain what kind of problems we have. he never even wanted to talk to us. he's just ignoring us. if something is going wrong, he should tell us and we can fix it right away. for me, there is no reason to come here because there are no big issues. it is a restaurant. some of the activities going on, people go in and out. that is normal. i am pretty sure it is possible
to find the right way. there is no reason to have a conflict. the people who are not finding the conflict. i am sure it is possible to find the right way to negotiate the problem. that is my personal opinion. thank you. >> good day, commissioners. i am actually a manager at bistro gambrinus. i have been there since day 1. i helped do the menu including food and beer. i am also of the eastern
european descent. i am a patron of other restaurants. i do go out. i like food , like likedbeer. it is one of my passions. it is a very neat place. we have a huge beer menu. we also have a huge food menu. it is not a sports bar. there are only a couple of places in the city that have similar food. we are one of them. i think we add to the neighborhood. some of the problems they described, we disagree with, but we cannot be held responsible for everything going on in the neighborhood that contains a
liquor store and a bus stop and so on. >> are there additional speakers for the project sponsored? >> i am the owner of the restaurant. i want to thank you and the planning commissioners. and my supporters who came to support. that is great. we are working very hard. my goal is to keep the peace and understanding between the neighbors. not a single time to the request your of the d.r. come to me and say here is the problem, let's talk. our goal is to be as we are. a full-service, eastern european restaurant. we would like to solve the
problem peacefully. i would be very happy to talk to anybody including my next-door neighbors. thank you. >> are there any additional speakers in support of the project sponsor. seeing none, project requestor. >> thank you, commissioner, madam president. clearly, there are very respectable people in the room. they seem to patronize and enjoy the restaurant as well. the restaurant doesn't cater to parties that go on late at night well past closing time. they do generate a high number of drunks and they do make the
neighborhood un safe. natalia and i live immediately next door. we are terribly inconvenienced and feel threatened by the people that often stand outside. they have stood in the way of natalia. they stand in my way as i approached the home. i am not as easily intimidated as natalia is. none of this is a fabrication. there are police reports i corroborate this. i would also welcome the opportunity to talk to the owners of the restaurant. i would like to do it in front of some authority like you.
they first moved in. i made an effort to work with sergei. he was parked in front of my driveway. he dumped his garbage in my garbage cans. i asked him not to. he continued to do so even more. his delivery trucks, at random times. they frequently blocked our driveway. i asked him not to allow that to happen. thank you. >> project sponsor, you have two minutes. >> as you have heard from representatives throughout the city, this is a respectable establishment. the most recent ratings of the restaurant was 100. really, i feel for the
applicants. this is not the appropriateness avenue for some of the allegations. all of them have been addressed by different departments. bistro gambrinus has been cleared of all of the allegations. these are very difficult economic times for us all. for small businesses. they are doing a phenomenal job. i support you all to support the permit application and 90 d.r. application -- deny the d.r. application. >> thank you. the public hearing is closed. vice-president miguel: i wish i knew who the building owner or
realtor was that are rigidly least the place to the current proprietor's. if they had done their job in an ethical manner, they would have let them know what was necessary to do to open this type of business there. we have no control over that. perhaps with the change in restaurant definitions, which we heard earlier today, some of this will go away. i have been to the restaurant, i have been there, and i have enjoyed a beer there. this is a situation where if it were german, i would call it a beer stool.
if it was english, i would call a pub. they are places you go to eat and enjoy beer. theuy must have 75 beers on their menu, one of the larger selections in san francisco. we are getting more and more places that cater to european beers, the beer's you can get on the west coast of the united states. they have a very extensive menu. at the time i was in there, there were young couples, there were groups of obvious students. the days i was there, the establishment did not exist. there were very few places to eat at that time.
i am really surprised that so many people come from all over the city. i have no idea where they parked. i was lucky and found a parking space within two blocks. it is a very clean, interesting, small restaurant. it is not that big. under 50 people. there are tv's. there are tv's in hotel bars now. that does not make it a sports bar. you are not going to watch a comedy show or a mystery show because without sound, it is not going to make sense. you watch sports because that is what you can follow on the tv's. as far as people spilling out
into the streets, it has got a door. it is not as if the entire front is open to the street. people are going to go outside and smoke. they do wso in every establishment in san francisco. there is no law against it. until there is, it is legal. it is just that simple. i see no problem in taking d.r. and approving the project with conditions because it's operating in exactly the manner that the code requires. if there are police problems, that is up to the police department to solve and not up to us. i am not seeing anyone bringing
in any actions from the police department. i am going to move to take d.r. and approve with conditions. that it can operate as it is currently. >> second. >> i would like to clarify one thing. the restaurant's current hours of operations are 12:00 p.m. until 10:00 p.m. monday through wednesday. they are not open on sundays. do you still go to a 11:00 p.m. on sundays? i would like to clarify our new web site, you can say that we can also accommodate large parties of up to 200 people at
the banquet hall. that is a different place. are you planning to extend the hours? do you know? >> commissioners, the motion on the floor is to approve the project with established conditions as drafted by staff. on that motion. commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner fong: aye. commissioner moore: aye. vice-president miguel: aye. president olague: aye. >> thank you, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously. president olague: is there any general public comment on items not on the agenda? seeing none, the general public comment is closed and the meeting is adjourned.
supervisor campos: good morning, everyone, and welcome to the tuesday, november 8, 2011 meeting of the san francisco county transportation authority's plans and programs committee. my name is david campos, the chair of the committee. we're joined by committee members, commissioners david chiu, john f. bellows, an scott wiener. vice chair carmen chu is in
route. the clerk of the committee is erika cheng. we want to thank the following members of sfgtv for their coverage, charles and jennifer. madam clerk, please call item number two. >> approve the minutes of the october 18, 2011 meeting, an action item. supervisor campos: before we take action, is there any member of the public that would like to speak on the minutes of the october 18 meeting? three minutes. >> first and foremost, i want to commend the mayoral candidates for doing due diligence and reporting at this meeting. it is a sign of good public service. having said that, those minutes,
i read the minutes, and if we are going to write the minutes in a very simplistic form, you know, just give ages of what happened, then is fine. but i think we need to have its across the board. if you look at the agenda items and you see the minutes linked to the cac, they're very short. and the other agenda items are going right into detail. having said that, i did try to state as clearly as possible the last time that the citizens advisory committee plays an important role. and one of the things that whoever represents or whoever is on at the cac, the citizens advisory committee, is they should bring some sort of experience. at one time we did have transit people who were involved,
transit union members, and so on and so forth, but if you look good page 17 of this report that is given to you, you'll see the people from the various districts, and you'll see some people who have been representing the cac from whaleback -- from way back, 1997. we have a member who is representing the cac firm way back in 1997. you can go to the candidates and see if what you see before you is right. what i am saying is we need expertise, and we need fresh blood. and even on the political side, here we have term limits. so i can understand if somebody is there for five or six years, but from way back in 1997 to
now, 14 years, that is shallow, that is drab. [bell rings] having said that, today you're going to hear from some new candidates, and i hope they have experience in it transit issues. because if they do not have other cac people with experience, then they're not able to participate in the deliberation, whether it is the subway, the central subway, or other millions of dollars that we discuss. i will be giving my comments on that, too. thank you very much. supervisor campos: thank you. in the other member of the public who would like to speak? the cnn, public comment is closed. we have an action item, the minutes. we have a motion and a second. we can take that without objection.
madam clerk, please call item number 3. >> citizens advisory committee report, an information item. supervisor campos: now if we could hear from the citizens' advisory committee. >> chairman campos and members of the committee, my name is bob switzer, and i am representing glenn davis today, who cannot be here. and me just say there is one item on your agenda that i have a personal interest in, and that is item four. but i am here today to make the presentation on behalf of the cac, and i wanted to be specific about item six. item six was handled by the cac on its consent calendar as an information item, and at the time it engendered no discussion. however, at the end of our agenda there were a couple of
comments that i want to convey to you and a couple of issues raised that would be appropriate to mention it to you. first, cac member wendy tran, who has been extremely helpful in our deliberations because of her expertise, has asked that the transportation impacts of the van ness avenue proposal before you have included the california medical center and whether or not those would be addressed in the draft environmental impact report for van ness avenue brt. staff noted that the authority had coordinated with the medical center throughout the van ness avenue brt/eir process, and the transportation analysis in the van ness avenue brt draft eir was consistent with the transportation analysis elsewhere. at the request of another of our
cac members, jacqueline sacks, we have asked to have california pacific medical center representatives present to present to the cac on the medical center's project and discuss how the project was coordinated with the plant in van ness avenue and geary corridor brt projects. as a conflict -- as a consequence of these two inquiries, we expect to hear more information at one of our next meetings. let me just say, with that, this item was placed on our consent calendar to allow us to provide more opportunity for deliberations and comments on the other action items throughout our agenda, some of which you receive the gallaspy meeting. with that, unless there are questions from your board, i will conclude my comments. supervisor campos: thank you very much, sir.
i do not see any questions, the thank you for the presentation. again, thank you to you and the rest of the cac for your service. is there any member of the public who would like to speak on this item? if so, please come forward. >> if i remember correctly, the last time one of the things we wanted to find out from the cac was if the central subway project had to come to a halt, the cac wanted to know the impact of it. and i would have thought that today the cac would have come up with some statements regarding that question. now some of the present here at the last meeting asked more
questions of the cac. and that points out what i stated earlier. we're dealing with a project like the central subway, and if the members of the cac have no idea, even though they say they're experts of the phase one, the third street light rail, then it is practically impossible for them to deliberate. and it is also practically impossible for the cac, without having any link to engineers and the designers, to find out exactly what is happening. now, the cac should be that entity that clears a lot of misunderstandings, because they are the citizens' advisory committee. and i know that they do not
truly represent, but how can they advise if they do not have the right information? if they're not educated on issues? now what has happened for a long time with the cac is that they kept on rubber stamping. and you keep on rubber stamping win there is politics behind it, but we know, as you know, supervisors, that on the central subway, there's a lot of politics. and when politics come, that type of politics, what it does is it divides the community. as i stated the last time, there was a meeting with the former mayor and some others that was brought to light. [bell rings] such types of devious actions linked with the central subway do not project anything
holistic. so, again, the cac must be vigilant. you can get advice could you cannot really give us some good reports here unless you are educated on issues. so do not make the cac a platform where, you know, you just have some drab dialogue. thank you very much. supervisor campos: thank you. anybody else from the public that would like to speak? seeing none, item is closed. call item number four. >> recommend appointment of one member to the citizens' advisory committee. this is an action item. supervisor campos: we can now hear from staff. >> good morning. i am a planner with the authority. by way of background, the authority has an 11-member citizen advisory committee, and each member serves a two-year term. the plans and programs committee recommends and the board appoints and committee members. on page 18 of your packet, you
can see a list of folks who have sent in applications to be on the citizens' advisory committee. on page 17, there is a listing with information on the existing members. to qualify for appointment to the cac, you have to be a san francisco resident, and you have to a pier once before this committee to speak to your qualifications. we currently have one vacancy, which is the result of mr. switzer, and he is interested of being reappointed. obviously, he is here today. supervisor campos: have we heard from the district supervisor, the district 7 a supervisor, on this appointment? >> i am the chief deputy. i believe the district 7 supervisor is still recruiting and discussing with mr. switzer. i should note, the